Yap Yin Kok v Public Prosecutor

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Chan Sek Keong JC
• Judgment Date: 07 September 1987
• Neutral Citation: [1987] SGHC 37
• Date: 07 September 1987
• Subject Matter: Show cause hearing,Bail,Extent of surety's obligation under surety bond,Application of ordinary principles of construction,Surety to show cause on bond,Appellant and surety failing to appear on date of hearing of appeal,Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
• Docket Number: Show Cause No 4 of 1987
• Published date: 19 September 2003
• Defendant Counsel: Jasvender Kaur (Deputy Public Prosecutor)
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Plaintiff Counsel: Ronald Ng (Ng Lee & Partners)

This case concerns the extent of the obligation of a surety under a surety bond for the appearance of an appellant in the High Court for the prosecution of his appeal against sentence of imprisonment.

The bond which was signed by the surety together with the appellant on 29 July 1986 read as follows:

... I, Yap Yin Kok, the abovenamed appellant, having been granted bail pending appeal pursuant to s 247 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 113), do hereby bind myself as follows:

(1) That in the event of my failing to lodge a petition of appeal as provided by s 246(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I shall personally appear at Court No 26, Subordinate Courts at Singapore on the eleventh day after I have received the signed copy of the grounds of judgment provided by s 246(3) of the said Code then and there to surrender myself forthwith to undergo the sentence ordered by the said court, and

(2) That in the event of my lodging a petition of appeal as provided by s 246(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, I shall personally appear at the High Court during the hearing of the appeal then and there to abide by the decision of the said High Court on the said appeal and surrender myself forthwith to undergo the sentence or pay the penalty ordered or which may be ordered by the High Court on the said appeal;

(3) That for so long as this bond shan remain in force, I shall not, without the permission of the court, proceed beyond the limits of Singapore.

... I, Wong Ee Tay, I/C 0753178H of Blk 56 Sims Dr #05-1091 do hereby declare myself surety of the above-named appellant that he shall abide by the conditions of this bond as stated above and in the case of his making default herein, I bind myself jointly and severally to forfeit to the Government the sum of dollars five thousand.

The relevant appeal was fixed for hearing on 28 January 1987 before the Chief Justice. The appellant appeared with his counsel who applied to be discharged. Counsel was discharged. The hearing was then adjourned to a date to be fixed and bail was extended.

By a notice dated 4 March 1987 from the Supreme Court Registry, the appellant and the surety were duly informed that the date of hearing of the appeal had been fixed for 6 April 1987.

On 16 April 1987, both the appellant and the surety failed to appear. The court then ordered that a warrant of arrest be issued against the appellant and also directed that the surety be asked to show cause on his bond. The hearing of the appeal was adjourned to a date which was subsequently fixed as 28 April 1987.

On 28 April 1987, a notice dated the same day was issued by the assistant registrar of the Supreme Court addressed to the surety requiring him to pay the sum of $5,000 for defaulting under his bond or to appear before the High Court on 29 June 1987 to show cause why payment of the said sum should not be enforced against him.

On 28 April 1987, the appellant surrendered himself at the High Court. His appeal against sentence was then heard and dismissed by the court.

On 29 June 1987, the surety`s son attended the hearing to show cause. He submitted a letter stating that his father was in the United States and would be returning at the end of July 1987. He requested for an adjournment so that his father could appear personally.

The surety has now appeared to...